The families of four passengers killed in the June 12 crash of an Air India Boeing (BA.N) have sued Boeing. The case opens new tab 787 said in a lawsuit that the accident resulted from allegedly faulty fuel switches, which the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has said do not appear to have caused the accident that killed 260 people.
The lawsuit, filed on Tuesday in Delaware Superior Court, blames Boeing and Honeywell, which manufactured the switches, for the crash that occurred seconds after Flight 171 took off from the Indian city of Ahmedabad for London.
The Lawsuit and Allegations
The plaintiffs point to a 2018 FAA advisory that recommended, but did not mandate, operators of several Boeing models, including the 787, inspect the fuel cutoff switches’ locking mechanism to ensure it could not be accidentally moved.
This lawsuit becomes the first case over the plane crash and highlights the ongoing debates about the manufacturer’s accountability, air safety practices, and regulatory oversight. The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages for the deaths of Kanta Bhen Dhirubhai, who was among the 2,209 passengers killed.
Investigation and Expert Opinions
India’s Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau’s (AAIB) preliminary investigation report into the crash stated that Air India had not conducted the suggested inspections, and that maintenance records showed that the throttle control module, which includes the fuel switches, was replaced in 2019 and 2023 on the plane involved in the crash. Aviation experts have expressed skepticism about the claim that the switches could be accidentally activated, citing their design and location.
The report noted “all applicable airworthiness directives and alert service bulletins were complied with on the aircraft as well as engines.” Boeing declined to comment, and Honeywell did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A cockpit recording of dialogue between the jet’s two pilots suggests that the captain cut the flow of fuel to the plane’s engines, as Reuters previously reported.
The lawsuit maintains that the switches are in a place in the cockpit where they were more likely to be inadvertently pushed, which “effectively guaranteed that normal cockpit activity could result in inadvertent fuel cutoff.”
However, aviation safety believes that they could not be accidentally flipped based on their location and design. The lawsuit appears to be the first in the United States over the crash.
It seeks unspecified damages for the deaths of Kantaben Dhirubhai Paghadal, Naavya Chirag Paghadal, Kuberbhai Patel, and Babiben Patel, who were among the 229 passengers who died. Twelve crew members and 19 people on the ground were also killed. One passenger survived. The plaintiffs are citizens of and live in either India or Britain.
About Boeing, Air India, and the 787 Dreamliner
Boeing has been manufacturing aircraft since 1916 and is one of the world’s largest aerospace companies. The Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which was introduced back in 2011, is being widely used by different air carriers for long-haul routes. Despite its modern design and fuel efficiency, the Dreamliner has faced several technical and operational issues in previous years. However, no crash of this magnitude has ever been linked to its fuel control system before.
Read more: Trump Calls Modi on Birthday Amid Strained Trade Ties
Indian investigators’ preliminary report appeared to exonerate Boeing and engine maker GE Aerospace (GE.N), opens new tab, but some family groups have criticized investigators and the press as too focused on the pilots’ actions.
Air India’s national carrier was founded in 1932 as Tata Airlines and became the country’s flag national carrier post-independence. Air India operates a mixed fleet of Boeing and Airbus aircraft, including the 787 Dreamliner, Boeing 777, and Airbus 320. While Air India has reported several incidents in the past, most of these accidents have been minor or non-fatal. However, the major fatal incidents include the 1978 Boeing 747 crash in New Delhi, the 1985 Boeing 737 overshoot in Mumbai, and the June 2025 Flight 171 disaster, which is now under intense international scrutiny.
Legal Implications and Global Precedent
Although most accidents are caused by a combination of factors, legal experts say lawyers representing victims’ families tend to target manufacturers because they do not face the same liability limits enjoyed by airlines. Such strategies can also increase the prospect of using U.S. courts, which are widely seen as more generous to plaintiffs than many foreign courts. As the case proceeds in Delaware, it has the potential to set a precedent for future global litigation over aviation accidents and for the families.